Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Should this to be take into court with him or should he send something in earlier?
    • This is the other sign  parking sign 1a.pdf
    • 4 means that they need to name and then tell the people who will be affected that there has been an application made, what the application relates to (specificially "whether it relates to the exercise of the court’s jurisdiction in relation to P’s property and affairs, or P’s personal welfare, or to both) and what this application contains (i.e what order they want made as a result of it) 5 just means that teh court think it is important that the relevant people are notified 7 means that the court need more information to make the application, hence they have then made the order of paragraph 1 which requires the applicant to do more - this means the court can't make a decision with the current information, and need more, hence paragraph one of the order is for the applicant to do more. paragraph 3 of the order gives you the ability to have it set aside, although if it was made in january you are very late. Were you notiifed of the application or not?    
    • These are the photos of the signs. At the entrance there is a 7h free sign. On some bays there is a permit sign.  Also their official website is misleading as it implies all parking is free.  I can't be certain of the exact parking bay I was in that day, and there was no PCN ticket on my car and no other evidence was provided.  parking sign 2.pdf
    • Hi, In my last post I mentioned I had received an email from SS who were asking me to hand over the keys to my mother’s flat so they could pass them to the Law firm who have been appointed court of protection to access, secure and insure my mother’s property.  Feeling this, all quickly getting out of my hands I emailed ss requesting proof of this. I HAVEN’T HEARD BACK FROM SS.  Yesterday, I received an email (with attached court of protection order) from the Law Firm confirming this was correct (please see below a copy of this).  After reading the court of protection order I do have some concerns about it:   (a)   I only found out yesterday, the Law firm had been appointed by the court back in January.  Up until now, I have not received any notification regarding this.  (b)   Section 2   - States I am estranged from my mother.  This is NOT CORRECT    The only reason I stepped back from my mother was to protect myself from the guy (groomer) who had befriended her & was very aggressive towards me & because of my mother’s dementia she had become aggressive also.  I constantly tried to warned SS about this guy's manipulative behaviour towards my mother and his increasing aggressiveness towards me (as mentioned in previous posts).  Each time I was ignored.  Instead, SS encouraged his involvement with my mother – including him in her care plans and mental health assessments.   I was literally pushed out because I feared him and my mother’s increasing aggression towards me. Up until I stepped back, I had always looked after my mother and since her admission to the care home, I visit regularly.   .(c)    Sections -  4, 5 and 7  I am struggling to understand these as I don’t have a legal background.  I was wondering if there is anyone who might be able to explain what they mean.  It’s been a horrendous situation where I had to walk away from my mother at her most vulnerable because of; ss (not helping), scammer and groomer. I have no legal background, nor experience in highly manipulative people or an understanding of how the SS system operates, finding myself isolated, scared and powerless to the point I haven’t collected my personal belongings and items for my mother’s room in the care home.  Sadly, the court has only had heard one version of this story SS’s, and based their decision on that. My mother’s situation and the experience I have gone through could happen to anyone who has a vulnerable parent.    If anyone any thoughts on this much appreciated.  Thank you. ______________________________________________________  (Below is the Court of Protection Order)  COURT OF PROTECTION                                                                                                                                                                                   No xxx  MENTAL CAPACITY ACT 2005 In the matter of Name xxx ORDER Made by  Depty District Judge At xxx Made on xxx Issued on 18 January 2024  WHEREAS  1.     xxx Solicitors, Address xxx  ("Applicant”) has applied for an order under the Mental Capacity Act 2005.  2.     The Court notes (my mother) is said to be estranged from all her three children and only one, (me) has been notified.  3.     (Me) was previously appointed as Atorney for Property and Affairs for (my mother).  The Exhibity NAJ at (date) refers to (me) and all replacement Attorneys are now officially standing down.  4.     Pursuant to Rule 9.10 of the Court of Protection Rules 2017 and Practice Direction 9B the Applicant 2must seek to identify at least three persons who are likely to have an interest in being notified that an application has been issues.”  The children of (my mother), and any other appointed attorneys are likely to have an interest in the application, because of the nature of relationship to (my mother).  5.     The Court considers that the notification requirements are an important safeguard for the person in respect of whom an order is sought.  6.     The Court notes that it is said that the local authority no longer has access to (my mother’s) Property.  7.     Further information is required for the Court to determine the application.  IT IS ORDERED THAT  Within 28 days of the issue date this order, the Applicant shall file a form COP24 witness statement confirming that the other children of (my mother) and any replacement attorneys have been notified of the application and shall confirm their name, address, and date upon which those persons were notified.  If the Applicant wishes the Court to dispense with any further notification, they should file a COP9 and COP24 explaining, what steps (if any) have been taken to attempt notification and why notification should be dispensed with.   Pending the determination of the application to appoint a deputy for (my mother), the Applicant is authorised to take such steps as are proportionate and necessary to access, secure and insure the house and property of (my mother).   This order was made without a hearing and without notice.  Any person affected by this order may apply within 21 days of the date on which the order was served to have the order set aside or varied pursuant to Rule 13.4 of the Court of Protection Rules 2017 (“the Rules”).  Such application must be made on Form COP9 and in accordance with Part 10 Rules.              
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like
  • Recommended Topics

Suspended from work


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5053 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

Hello,

 

Stumbled apon this site via google, I have quite a list I could use some advice on, i'll try to be as clear as possible.

 

First off I work for a council, in a school, due to staff cuts my position has been subject to a skills audit resulting to my colleague being made redundant.

 

As a final hurrah before leaving my colleague obtained various bits of information from our headteachers documents circulated them to the press. He was promptly arrested and has confessed.

 

As a two-man IT department I was initially asked not to come in for the first day after the weekend this happened, the site was closed due to the nature of the information and I.T. systems investigated, I was then told to take the rest of the week off as the network was still down and i would not be able to complete my daily duties due to the investigation (I know this investigation was not ongoing atleast on site after the first day due to information from other staff).

 

After the first week I was told I could come back to work, my line manager provided with new keys to our office and told our support guys would inform me of logins etc in due course, two hours later I was summoned to the front office and informed I was being suspended.

 

The grounds for suspension were that due to my close working relationship with the offending colleague, and the fact that all administrator logins were shared, I posed a security risk. I was also informed the found items on my PC which caused concern. I was escorted to my office which I was asked to clear of my belongings. I was not given a copy of our grevience policy or any relating documents.

 

UNISON rep was called and I was informed they were aware of the situation having been contacted by my colleague and the head of HR, he assured me this was a precautionary measure and that someone would be available to attend any meetings.

 

3 weeks on I have been asked to attend an off site meeting to be interviewed about the above.

 

 

I have a number of concerns about this:

  • The meeting is outside of my normal working hours, I work 0800-1600, meeting it at 1600 and some distance from my place of work.
  • I know exactly what has happened due to my colleague informing me after his arrest, this information was disclosed to my employer shortly after i was told. I feel any answers I give in my interview may be compromised by this knowledge, before being told I knew nothing.
  • I am currently off work sick with depression, my employment issues are contributing but not the primary reason for this, I have been signed by my GP. I am in no fit state yet to attend the interview.
  • I have not been informed what has been found or what I am suspected of doing therefore have had no time to prepare answers.

All administrator logins were shared between the two Technicians, as are workstations in the office i am concerned that anything he has done may be attributed me.

 

We had been working without an IT manager for over a year and had no guidance on security, best practices etc. In a previous annual appraisal I raised 7 pages worth of concerns to the head to which I was told "we employ you to have the answers to those, but your not responsible" this is documented in my staff file. We were only recently (2-3 weeks) given an Acceptable ICT Use Policy, due to issues mainly relating to how we apply this to other staff we had not signed this document and were waiting to meet with line manager to discuss.

 

Two further issues;

 

As an amateur photographer I purchased an excess portfolio folder from our technology department, then filled it with images, including some of my children, when being asked to remove my stuff from the office this portfolio was seized due to the images "possibly" being printed at work - there is no facility for this, although I have no receitps for their external printing. I am concerned with having images of my kids being in the possetion of unknown others. One contact has advised me to formally request this item back as their grounds are unreasonable and outside of the scope of the investigation, if not returned; assume they wish to purchase the images and invoice them accordingly, this made me lol.

 

Further more during this period of suspension applications are being received for the IT manager position (newly created in the new structure). The deadline for the applications was originally 07.06.10, I was informed by a member of the admin team that this had been extended to 11.06.10 due to technical problems with the school website causing application forms not to be available. I forwarded my application special delivery and it was received before the 11.06.10 deadline. I have now received a letter stating that as me application was received after the 07.06.10 deadline it was not considered. How can I approach this? I know of one other applicant who was informed via email by the same admin team member of the 11.06.10 date, Im hoping he kept the message, although im not sure yet.

 

Thanks in advance, apologies for the post length.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello and welcome to CAG. I'm sorry to hear about all your problems. It's certainly complicated, isn't it?

 

I expect the others will be along to comment later and I will have a look later if I have time.

 

For now though, I have a vague recollection that you may not be required to attend a meeting while you're signed off sick. Hopefully someone will comment.

 

HB

Illegitimi non carborundum

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello,

 

Stumbled apon this site via google, I have quite a list I could use some advice on, i'll try to be as clear as possible.

 

First off I work for a council, in a school, due to staff cuts my position has been subject to a skills audit resulting to my colleague being made redundant.

 

As a final hurrah before leaving my colleague obtained various bits of information from our headteachers documents circulated them to the press. He was promptly arrested and has confessed.

 

As a two-man IT department I was initially asked not to come in for the first day after the weekend this happened, the site was closed due to the nature of the information and I.T. systems investigated, I was then told to take the rest of the week off as the network was still down and i would not be able to complete my daily duties due to the investigation (I know this investigation was not ongoing atleast on site after the first day due to information from other staff).

 

After the first week I was told I could come back to work, my line manager provided with new keys to our office and told our support guys would inform me of logins etc in due course, two hours later I was summoned to the front office and informed I was being suspended.

 

The grounds for suspension were that due to my close working relationship with the offending colleague, and the fact that all administrator logins were shared, I posed a security risk. I was also informed the found items on my PC which caused concern. I was escorted to my office which I was asked to clear of my belongings. I was not given a copy of our grevience policy or any relating documents.

 

In what way a 'security risk'? Surely with new login names and passwords any such 'risk' would be eliminated? Have you not been told (basically if without going into details) what type of material on the PC warranted further investigation. Presumably the suspension and reasons for it have been confirmed in writing?

 

UNISON rep was called and I was informed they were aware of the situation having been contacted by my colleague and the head of HR, he assured me this was a precautionary measure and that someone would be available to attend any meetings.

 

3 weeks on I have been asked to attend an off site meeting to be interviewed about the above.

 

Have they given any more specific details about the nature of the allegation?

 

I have a number of concerns about this:

  • The meeting is outside of my normal working hours, I work 0800-1600, meeting it at 1600 and some distance from my place of work.
  • I know exactly what has happened due to my colleague informing me after his arrest, this information was disclosed to my employer shortly after i was told. I feel any answers I give in my interview may be compromised by this knowledge, before being told I knew nothing.
  • I am currently off work sick with depression, my employment issues are contributing but not the primary reason for this, I have been signed by my GP. I am in no fit state yet to attend the interview.
  • I have not been informed what has been found or what I am suspected of doing therefore have had no time to prepare answers.

An investigatory meeting is slightly different to a disciplinary hearing as it seeks to determine whether a case warrants the disciplinary process, however you should have some information as to what is being investigated. If this is not provided then you cannot answer questions during the meeting which you have had insufficient time to consider. Simply say that you believe something to be incorrect but need more time/details in order to be able to answer. If necessary you can ask for the meeting to be adjourned.

 

You cannot be forced to attend if you are off sick, and it would be reasonable to ask for an alternative date, however as procedures have to follow a reasonable timetable, be aware that they can hold the investigation in your absence (and similarly any disciplinary hearings which may follow).

 

If the meeting is scheduled outside of your normal working hours and an unreasonable distance away, then you should be able to ask for an alternative location and time.

 

All administrator logins were shared between the two Technicians, as are workstations in the office i am concerned that anything he has done may be attributed me.

An investigation should look at that possibility with all available evidence. If the policy of shared logins makes that impossible, then it will not be correct to attribute wrongdoings to a specific user. Times and dates of documents may be relevant as if you can definitely exclude yourself from one activity this will add weight to the 'it wasn't me, it was him' argument.

 

We had been working without an IT manager for over a year and had no guidance on security, best practices etc. In a previous annual appraisal I raised 7 pages worth of concerns to the head to which I was told "we employ you to have the answers to those, but your not responsible" this is documented in my staff file. We were only recently (2-3 weeks) given an Acceptable ICT Use Policy, due to issues mainly relating to how we apply this to other staff we had not signed this document and were waiting to meet with line manager to discuss.

 

Supporting evidence to aid the investigation

 

Two further issues;

 

As an amateur photographer I purchased an excess portfolio folder from our technology department, then filled it with images, including some of my children, when being asked to remove my stuff from the office this portfolio was seized due to the images "possibly" being printed at work - there is no facility for this, although I have no receitps for their external printing. I am concerned with having images of my kids being in the possetion of unknown others. One contact has advised me to formally request this item back as their grounds are unreasonable and outside of the scope of the investigation, if not returned; assume they wish to purchase the images and invoice them accordingly, this made me lol.

 

They may argue that this material warrabted investigation due to the folder containing images of children - awful I know, but probably necessary in today's climate - the images may well be yours but they are stored on a school facility. This should only be retained for as long as necessary though and you can make a reasonable request for the material to be returned once it is established that it is your property and of no importance to the investigation.

 

Further more during this period of suspension applications are being received for the IT manager position (newly created in the new structure). The deadline for the applications was originally 07.06.10, I was informed by a member of the admin team that this had been extended to 11.06.10 due to technical problems with the school website causing application forms not to be available. I forwarded my application special delivery and it was received before the 11.06.10 deadline. I have now received a letter stating that as me application was received after the 07.06.10 deadline it was not considered. How can I approach this? I know of one other applicant who was informed via email by the same admin team member of the 11.06.10 date, Im hoping he kept the message, although im not sure yet.

 

You need to complain about being given misleading information giving the reasons why and stating how you believed that the deadline was extended. Without evidence this may be difficult.

 

Thanks in advance, apologies for the post length.

 

..

Any advice given is done so on the assumption that recipients will also take professional advice where appropriate.

 

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

DONATE HERE

 

If I have been helpful in any way - please feel free to click on the STAR to the left!

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...